arXiv:2610.19166v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Meta-evaluation of text generation metrics and LLM-judges is primarily conducted using metric-human correlations. However, prior work has shown that co...
By Anubhav Jangra, Adrian de Wynter
arXiv:2609.22112v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated the ability to generate user-specific text with high stylistic fidelity. However, the personal data that...
By Muhammed Nazmul Arefin, Omar Jamal Hammad
arXiv:2608.23124v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Personalized text generation for authors and literary writing is essential for applications such as adaptive writing assistants, creative support too...
By Jinghui Zhang, Lang Gao, Ao Li, Mingzhe Li, Ruihong Zeng, Zirui Song, Kentaro Inui, Xiuying Chen
Personalized text generation for authors and literary writing is essential for applications such as adaptive writing assistants, creative support tools, and computational literary analysis. However, e...
arXiv:2608. 19746v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Personalized text generation aims to make LLMs write in a specific individual's style, yet existing benchmarks measure task accuracy or preference alignment rather than whether the model's output actually resembles the target author's writing.
By Yash Ganpat Sawant
The paper examines whether existing automatic methods can reliably assess creativity in text produced by large language models (LLMs). By collecting human ratings on 11 creativity dimensions for both human and AI short stories, the authors compare these judgments with automated metrics and LLM-as-a-Judge evaluations. The results show a significant misalignment: automated metrics and LLM judges favor AI-generated stories and show near-zero correlation with human assessments, revealing fundamental limitations in current computational approaches to evaluating creative text.
By Alessandro Tutone, Giorgio Franceschelli, Mirco Musolesi